What is even going on with these comments? As soon as I saw this was a text feature about a new iPhone my eyes glazed over. I have no clue how so many people are able to muster up so much bile about an opinion-free news article on the internet about a slightly shinier version of a mobile telephone. And a watch.

Lots of people, including many who visit the site, mostly or only play games on iOS these days. This is relevant to Giant Bomb. Please be civil.

I'm fairly sure a few of the usernames credited in that LordKat article are the same folks who were planning the harassment attacks on Quinn and other Indie devs from the IRC logs she posted. Odd coincidence. Maybe those are just common internet usernames.

Either way, we're not really receptive to unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, from either side. Like insults and pejorative labels, it's just going to stir up more trouble between two groups of people who are clearly not going to see eye-to-eye about these attacks and harassment any time soon. I'm not saying that we're going to shut this conversation down (though we'll continue to delete posts that are insulting or discuss someone's private life) but let's not throw any more fuel onto the fire than is strictly necessary.

All the same, I would perhaps advise anyone to treat an article or video exposé that credits a person who posted "We need to stop caring about ZQ tweets and start finding ways to crack ZQ emails lol" and "DO NOT TALK BLACKHAT HERE, TALK IN PM" to a public chatroom with some degree of skepticism.

I got super side-tracked this week. Shortly after completing the US Block for December '93, I decided for whatever reason that I ought to be screencapping the company logo screens at the start of the games I was covering, at least whenever they were different. I've added about 150 of those to the relevant company pages.

At which point I got distracted by how empty those company pages were of text and worked on a few of those too.

And then I started discovering cases where we had multiple similar company pages that needed combining. Loriciels and Loriciel SA; Gremlin Graphics Software and Gremlin Interactive; Virgin Games, Virgin Games and Virgin Interactive; Pack-In-Soft and Pack-In-Video; Victor Entertainment Ltd. and Victor Entertainment; RSP and Riedel Software Productions. Most are cases where a company renamed itself something very similar at some point during its existence, meaning there should have been a chronological division between the two pages; however, because the names were so similar there were plenty of cases where a wiki editor more or less flipped a coin when it came to crediting a game page to one or the other and the two pages became an unholy mess. We might still have a lot of cases remaining where the wrong company page is attached to a game at the release level (it'll just say "Delete" for developer/publisher) so if any of you editors find one, feel free to change it.

Anyway, I'm absolutely with you with regards to single pages for multiple releases. Can I assume you're referring to things like game shows? A lot of the licenses to those adaptations passed hands in the 30 or so years they've been around, and even though the games are functionally identical each developer had different ideas for the presentation and interface. There's a few other licenses that had the same issue too (an anime called Ginga Eiyuu Densetsu, or Legend of the Galactic Heroes, had a single game page for what turned out to be at least six identically-titled but otherwise separate adaptations).